The latest fatality in York will no doubt be coolly disregarded by the ideologues who run the Cyclists' Touring Club. It’s statistically insignificant and they know best.

I would argue that if you base your concept of cycling safety on measuring official road casualty statistics against cycle counts of commuter cycling, you arrive at bogus conclusions about how incredibly safe cycling is. This not only ignores the reality of the growing exposure to risk which cyclists face in a mass motoring society where lawless and reckless driving is at very high levels (are we supposed to believe that drivers in York scrupulously obey speed limits and don’t drive while using mobile phones?) but also ignores an individual’s subjective perception of danger. They appear to be very high in York, if these comments are anything to go by:

A York cyclist writes:

THE headlines regarding a cyclist’s death (The Press, December 7) illustrate starkly how dangerous it remains to be a cyclist in York.

Press coverage of the death of York cyclist, Ruby Milnes, is rather more than a spoiler for news of the successful bid for money and status for cycling in York. The tragic and aviodable death of one of York´s promising young citizens on a supposedly safe cycle path is an utter shame. It would have cost very little to ensure her safety ...and that of the hundreds of other users of that path. Ruby died because of the failure of CYC [City of York Council] to manage and administer safety on an existing cycle path. If safety cannot be assured on our existing cycle paths, what is the point of expanding the network?